Skip to main content

tv   MSNBC Live  MSNBC  March 25, 2011 6:00pm-7:00pm EDT

6:00 pm
thanks for coming on "hardball." >> thank you. >> that's "hardball" for now. more politics ahead with ce cenk uyger coming up. welcome to the show. i'm cenk uyger. i've got news for you. the middle east is on fire. revolutions are lighting up the region today. we have unrest in at least five countries, including deadly clashes in syria. government forces reportedly open fired on protesters in several syrian cities. much of the violence occurred in dahra. residents reported fatalities with unconfirmed reports of as many as 30 slain throughout syria. prior to that, at least 55 people had been killed during this week of unrest. in libya, coalition war planes are hammering gadhafi's forces in the eastern city of ajdabiya
6:01 pm
today. france declared the no-fly zone, quote, under control. beginning tomorrow, a canadian commander will take over the mission in libya. president obama will address the american people, quote, in the very near future about the u.s. role going forward. the government met with the african union to hammer out a solution. there's violence in other areas of the region as well. in jordan, the associated press reports more than 100 people injured. clashes in ahman were the most i violent in that country in two months of protest. in bahrain, security forces fired tear gas and pellets at anti-government protests. thousands defied a ban on
6:02 pm
gathering followi ining prayers. and in yemen, the leader says h he's ready to step down, but only if he can leave the government in safe hands. gadhafi is now negotiating. the leaders of tunisia and egypt are already gone. yemen is on the verge of being knocked out, as you heard. these long-running dictatorships are on the ropes. why? because history is changing before our very eyes. there used to be a time when barberism and conquest was par for the course. it was what was expected. the mongols once wiped out a town and destroyed every building, but they also diverted a river that ran through the town. you want to know why? they wanted to wipe the town off
6:03 pm
the map and they did. do you know what the name of that town is? no? you're not alone. no one does. it disappeared into mystery. war was hell and of course you killed civilians. even in this century, the amount of civilians killed during the world war ii numbered in 348the millions and we did our fair share. but two things have changed since then, that have changed the world in my opinion -- america and media. i know some will accuse me of bing jingoistic, rah-rah america. but i'm trying to remind us of our better angels. we rebuilt europe, we rebuilt our foreign enemies and turned them into our top allies. we started the yienunited nati 7 37. we spread the idea of human rights around the human world until something amazing happened. we changed expectations. yes, many civilians have died since then in times of war. but now the entire context of war has changed. everyone assumes we're supposed to protect the civilians.
6:04 pm
as i said, that was partly us. but one more thing helped tremendously, the media. now, let me give you an example in a different context. black people were crushed and abused in this country for centuries. but when we saw for our own eyes people running fire hoses and releasing vicious dogs on black crowds who were peaceably protesting, we couldn't look at ourselves in the mirror anymore, and television was that mirror and itn't co-s to continues to help of the web. so in western syria in 1982, anywhere from 17,000 to 40,000 people were killed, inse no one it. but when his son, who's currentl just ask gadhafi if you can still kill your own people and .
6:05 pm
now, is our response perfect? of course not. can we stop the killing or oppression of all people throughout the world? of course not. but we are on the right road. we are on the road to justice and we should. rightfully proud of that. joining me is former senior director of middle east at the national security council. also joining me is the anwar sadat center of peace and development. in libya, are we on the right road here? have we prevented massacres and is that already a form of victory in terms of the road of justice that i just laid out? >> look, there's no question. i think if you look at it, had we not intereven iffed, imagine what might have happened in benghazi. no one today doubt what is gadhafi is capable of doing. this guy is living in his own
6:06 pm
world. and obviously a lot could have m happened and the rest of the world would have seen it. it's impossible, even with all the restrictions that are being applied by the gadhafi regime, it's impossible for people to see it. and the pressure would have mounted on the international community to intervene. and if we didn't, we would have failed the people of libya, but more importantly, you know, it's not just certainly a moral issue for the international community and was done right because it was through the u.n. with support from the arab league, with arab public opinion largely supportive of this intervention. so in that sense, it was done right. you know, if we hadn't intervened, you could imagine also some consequences for america's national interests. people talk about, you know, what's the american national interest in libya. well, it's not just libya, you know, it's a movement that is sweeping the entire region. it's being watched not just by libyans, it's being watched by egyptians by tunisians.
6:07 pm
i think in the end this is a movement on the right side of history. it's an empowerment of the public that's not going to go away. if we're not on the side of that movement, we're going to pay a price, because in my own judgment, the success of the mostly peaceful revolutions. think about this, not just in egypt and tunisia, but also in libya started as peaceful demonstrations. in yemen, despite all of the weapons that are available, the slogans, peaceful, peaceful, those are the slogans in syria. this is, you know, exactly the nightmare of bin laden who wants to try to create change through militancy. in some ways, we have an investments in seeing those movements succeed for american's national interest in addition to the moral investment. >> as you look at this, you've
6:08 pm
got to be fairly ecstatic over it. we're helping to hopefully top a dictator and support democracy in the middle east, isn't that what you guys wanted? >> well, i agree, if we had not acted when we did, the catastrophe in benghazi would have been tremendous. i think servicemen and women participating in this should be proud they prevented that from happening. i also think there are knock-on affects in the region. i think syrian protests and others, they see the international community in libya and perhaps it gives them hope that people in the world are actually standing with them. i do think we need to look more systematic at our policy in the region and ask first of all, in libya, the administration does have a problem of stating the political aim of regime change of gadhafi must step down.
6:09 pm
it's ironically brought them criticism from both sides. people who don't think we have an interest there and people who think we should be there more robustly. >> if that's the case, though, you're not advocating for ground troops, are you? that obviously proved disastrous in iraq and here we would be in the middle of'm advocating for of things, cenk. i think the administration needs to be much more clear about its strategy with people they spent time building up a rhetorical case the stakes are quite high for america in the region and for america specific cliff in libya, yet they still seem to be going reluctantly into this intervention and saying we want to get out as soon as possible. it's difficult to square those things. >> not really, and i'll tell you why. on the one hand, we want to do the right thing and we want to lead. we did in the beginning. on the other hand, we don't want
6:10 pm
the responsibility of a third war, if our allies can handle it, isn't that a great thing? >> i think what we need to do is be clear with the american people, if there's a strong u.s. interest here, what are we doing to satisfy that interest or advance that interest. you'll see in each case of an upprizing here, we've taken a lot of time evaluating the situation as though we'ree that for democracy in these countries is in our interest. or is it broader than just the individual circumstances in one city or one place. or is this much more narrow and, in fact, there aren't great u.s. interests at stake here. in which case, the american people could expect something different. i don't at all agree that we shouldn't have intervened in libya. i think it's quite important we intervened in libya. what i think is important is that we communicate to the
6:11 pm
american people very clearly what the american interest is here and what we're doing to advance it. the president spoke robustly about libya in the days and weeks before this intervention, but then when we intervened, the president has been relatively silent. >> there's a good reason for that. look, i wanted him to move into libya quicker as well. but do you know what happened? it turns out behind the scenes, he was organizing allies. it's better to go in with allies than go in unilaterally. >> but cenk, let me say something about that. our allies madelear that,n fact, we were the ones who we reluctant for about a week and a ha about the u.n. security council resolution. >> it depends on which allies you're talking about. the french and the british, you're right. if you're talking about the turks, that's not right. >> i think that's no the right also because ultimately everybody was waiting for the arab league. everybody understood that you need this regional legitimacy. >> exactly. >> and once that came, it happened very rapidly. not only that, the u.s. actually strengthened the resolution and
6:12 pm
made it possible to go beyond the no-fly zone to protection of civilians, which allowed the forces to act more forcibly. that was an american amendment to the resolution. so the u.s. moved rapidly once the support came from -- >> of professor, let me follow up on that. do you think we should stay until gadhafi is gone? or is that too ambitious a goal? >> well, that is the goal of the american foreign policy. the president stated it. whether or not this is going to be the interpretation of the u.n. security council resolution remains to be seen. the resolution authorizes any action that endangers civilians. whetr re community, we will see. but that's clearly an objective of american foreign policy. let me just make one thing clear. look, the administration -- part of the reluctance was not just to get international support, which was essential. and it should not have been done
6:13 pm
unilaterally under any circumstances, but remember, one of the wonderful things about the ejips and tunisian revolution was they were indigenous. no one could say this is the u.s. meddling or france meddl g meddling. the middle east does not like foreign intervention, let alone western intervention. and it was to balance those two together. it was incredible that it was played well enough that now we have receptivity by an arab public that historically opposed any western intervention across the board. if you look at the sentiment in the region, it's far more hospitable to western intervention, including american >> mike, let me end with you on that. this president did do nuance and he brought these people onboard and brought these arab allies onboard, european allies onboard and it looks like it's working for the moment. shouldn't he get credit for
6:14 pm
that? >> i think the president should get our support in what is a military intervention in another country. i think, yes, we're to congratulate our servicemen and women andur prede from evti aascr ngzi buye multilateralism is quite important, but we need to be clear about tradeoffs, cenk. and the fact is that earlier intervention as you acknowledged would have had more impact here. the fact is that right now, the rebels control only this eastern slice of libya when, in fact, they previously controlled much of western libya. there was a tradeoff in there. >> no question about that. inging the allies was incredibly important. it's an imperfect world. and the fact that we've actually taken action i think is a good thing and obviously we're going to have to see how it plays out. the canadians apparently are taking command tomorrow. thank you both so much for joining us this evening. we really appreciate it. >> now, newt gingrich has tried to explain his flip-flop on
6:15 pm
libya, but guess what? he's digging himself even deeper. come on, stop, man. not again. and an explosion in the hispanic population is horrible news for republicans. but they have a plan to attack voters. that sounds like a bad idea. we'll tell you all about it.
6:16 pm
6:17 pm
the critics of president obama's libya policy, of course, are out in full force. but one person with experience all over the world says it's the right policy and it's work on the ground in libya. he's next. [ male announcer ] when chips ahoy! real chocolate chips collide with original heath toffee bars, every delicious cookie is crammed with chocolatey toffee joy. ♪ chips ahoy!...
6:18 pm
[ crunch ] crammed with joy.
6:19 pm
gingrich is still flip flopping about libya. you've got to give it up. last night he ripped into the no-fly zone strategy. >> if they're serious about protecting civilians, you can't do that from the air. this is a fundamental mistake and i think is a typical politician's overreliance on air power. >> so last night air power alone wasn't enough for newt. but are you going to surprised to find out he was singing a different tune two weeks ago on the very same fox show. >> we don't have to send troops. all we have to do is suppress his air force. >> come on! are you for the no-fly zone or aren't you? this is about the fifth flip flop on the same exact issue. what does newt think about flip floppers? this is what he said in 2004, quote, you can't flip flop and be commander-in-chief. exactly. well said, mr. gingrich.
6:20 pm
but he isn't alone. the chair of the house foreign affairs committee is right there with him. in late february, she released this statement about gadfi. quote, stronger penalties must be imposed in order to hold the regime accountable for its heinous crimes. additional u.s. and international measures should include the establishment and enforcement of a no-fly zone. but then the very day that the no-fly zone was enforced she told ach local tv station, quote, the case has not been made for me to be satisfied that this is the right move for the berey become normal operating pr procedure for republicans. but perhaps the most ridiculous flip-flop comes from good old oliver north. here it is. >> quite frankly, it's unparalleled in my entire experience in the military, going back to the 1960s, every president has gone to the
6:21 pm
congress to get a resolution to support whatever it is he wanted to do. >> so now all of a sudden oliver north thinks we should get congressional approval? congressional approval? oliver north? >> i will tell you right now, council, and all the members here gathered that i misled the congress. i misled -- >> at that meeting? >> at that meeting. face to face. >> face to face. >> you made false statements to them about your activities in support of the contras? >> i did. >> oops. north, of course, is infamous for not getting the approval of congress as he sold weapons to iran for the benefit of the contras. he was indicted on 16 felony counts for not getting congressional approval and for lying to congress. you've got to give it to them, man. they've got chutzpah. to put north up there to say you've got to get congressional approval.
6:22 pm
obviously they're playing political games and we've seen it before. that's a shame. if we give the president more than a week to make his strategy work in libya, it may just be the approach to humanitarian intervention we've been trying to get right for years. i asked a new york times columnist that very question last night while he was in cairo. isn't this what we've been waiting for for decades? global action t massacres by dictators? >> yeah, it absolutely is. maybe the oldest problem in international relations is what you do when you have a dictator devouring his own people. and normally the answer is you kind of wring your hands. and after it's over, you hold memorial services and solemnly say, if only we had known. this time we're actually doing something and doing it pretty speedily. it took 3 1/2 years after bosnia began before the u.s. and
6:23 pm
international community really reacted. this time it took 3 1/2 weeks. so there's real progress. >> and what are people on the ground saying? the average libyan, if you will. are they happy with the military intervention? >> there's no doubt that people in eastern libya are overwhelmingly happy with intervention. now, it is true that people in eastern libya have always been more antagonistic towards gadhafi. in western libya, it's harder to gauge because they're under gadhafi control and people can't speak freely. but when one does speak, when he will talk to people in tripoli or in places arou s around it, does seem to be a real antipathy for him as well, although not as much as in the east. >> there's always ways of telling. the refugee movement, are people going in or out of the country? and what do you think that
6:24 pm
indicates? >> i mean, that's fascinating because obviously there is a lot of concern about whether the strikes, the air strikes are going to lead to civilian casualties. but right before those air strikes began, you had libyans pouring out of libya into egypt at about eight times the normal rate. and then once those air strikes began, the exodus stopped and, in fact, was reversed. and now libyans are returning to libya. going back over towards the air strikes, which suggests to me that their real concern isn't, you know, allied air strikes. it's rather gadhafi himself. >> right. so is it fair to say at this point, at least as far as stopping the massacres. i know there's many objections, but that's certainly one of them. that that has worked for the moment being? >> yes, it absolutely has. it certainly worked in benghazi. if he we had not intervened, benghazi's streets would be drenched with blood right now.
6:25 pm
and in misrata, it was a harder case because gadhafi was already right inside misrata. but now, he has pulled back. apparently today, there are only two injuries after days in which there were many, many people killed. so the momentum seems to have shifted and these kind of masseaacs atwod ha hpedthwi jst a t ppin it hd g ateioto a massacre that doesn't happen. you can't cover a massacre that doesn't happen, but that's, in fact, what the alternative reality would have been had we not intervened. >> and how is this different than iraq, which you opposed? >> i opposed iraq because, you know, when you talk to iraqis, then it was clear that on the one hand, theyhe distrusted the u.s., disliked the idea of u.s. troops on their territory and they thought this was all a big con to steal iraqi oil.
6:26 pm
on the other hand, you talk to libyans and they desperately want u.s. involvement. maybe not troops on the ground. you know, i don't think we should send troops on the ground and many libyans would not want that either. but the kind of intervention that has happened so far in terms of no-flight zone, no-drive zone, air strikes. that is something that seems to have overwhelming support from libyans themselves. and that's a huge difference from iraq. >> now, you know, i've been talking about this throughout this show. it seems that people cannot get it through their thick heads that maybe the extreme answer isn't the right answer in every case. whether we either do absolutely nothing or we send in every troop we've got in a ground invasion. we do air cover and see if gadhafi gets toppled. but i want to ask you an interesting question. if gadhafi doesn't get toppled, is it still a victory because we stopped the massacres? >> oh, absolutely.
6:27 pm
it would be nice in tripoli. if you're alive today and your children are alive today because of the no-fly zone, that sure feels like a victory to you. the biggest problem in averting humanitarian disasters is ideal solutions. nothing works brilliantly. the temptation is to do nothing. this time we're doing something. it's not ideal. there are a million uncertainties, but one of the certainties is that there are a lot of people in benghazi who are alive today who wouldn't be otherwise. >> it seems to me that people are being wildly unfair to the president. we haven't had even a week of this so far and it seems look it's already accomplished one of its major goals and somehow this is being chalked up as a bad idea because it's a solution in the middle. that's my thought on it. do you think that this strategy
6:28 pm
might actually work? are critics at home being unfair to this approach? >> on the one hand, i think some of the criticisms have validity to it. there are uncertainties, but on the other hand, you have to weigh that against a lot of people alive today who wouldn't be otherwise. and another criticism made that has validity is that we're inconsistent. we intervene in libya and we don't in ivory coast. that's true, too. but i would rather inconsistently safe some lives than consistently save none. >> we want to thank nick kristof, of course. and up next, what on earth are steven segal and george arpaio doing in a tank together? we'll tell you.
6:29 pm
homeowners -- rates have been going up, but you can still refinance to a fixed rate as low as 4.75% at plus, get the best deal or we'll pay you $1,000. today. [ female announcer ] start your morning... hey. what are you doing up? i thought i'd take a drive before work. want to come? [ female announcer ] or make his day. yeah. [ female announcer ] maxwell house gives you a rich, full-flavored cup of coffee, so you can be good to the last drop. [ female announcer ] maxwell house gives you a rich, full-flavored cup of coffee, how are you getting to a happier place? running there? dancing there? how about eating soup to get there? campbell's soups fill you with good nutrition, farm-grown ingredients, and can help you keep a healthy weight. campbell's. it's amazing what soup can do. i'm gonna use less honey.
6:30 pm
i'm gonna text less. well, i'm gonna use less bath tissue with charmin!!! [ female announcer ] charmin ultra soft's ultra-cushiony design is soft and more absorbent. so you can use four times less versus the leading value brand. charmin ultra soft.
6:31 pm
6:32 pm
america's sheriff, so called, joe arpaio rolled out two armored vehicles, a s.w.a.t. team and steven segal to bust one suspected dock -- cock fighter in phoenix this week. the small army with segal ran over a gate, stormed the property, and arrested the unarmed suspect without incid t incident. wow, that wasn't exciting. some residents of the quiet neighborhood were so worried about the massive show of force, they actually called 911. segal was on the scene because sheriff joe is allowing him and his tv crew to film his reality
6:33 pm
tv series "law man." some are criticizing arpaio spending taxpayer dollars to promote segal's reality show. that's a very fair criticism. while they were spending taxpayer money, it resulted in thousands of dollars of damage to the property. and 115 of the 130 roosters were actually euthanized. what was the point of busting up the cock fighting if you're going to kill the roosters in i w -- any way. the next movie title "the gop -- violence is the answer. i forgot the question." news out today makes the republican fight much harder with hispanic voters. why that might eventually destroy the republican party. ♪ that's logistics ♪ ♪ a-di-os, cheerio, au revoir ♪
6:34 pm
♪ off it goes, that's logistics ♪ ♪ over seas, over land, on the web, on demand ♪ ♪ that's logistics ♪ ♪ operations worldwide, ups on your side ♪ ♪ that's logistics ♪ ♪ that's the way, uh-huh, uh-huh ♪ ♪ i like it, uh-huh, uh-huh ♪ that's the way, uh-huh, uh-huh ♪ ♪ i like it [ male announcer ] introducing mio -- a revolutionary liquid water enhancer. add a little. add a lot. ♪ for a drink that's just the way you like it. ♪ i like it, uh-huh, uh-huh ♪ that's the way, uh-huh, uh-huh ♪ [ male announcer ] make it yours. make it mio. ♪ [ slap! slap! slap! slap! slap! ] [ male announcer ] your favorite foods fighting you? fight back fast with tums. calcium rich tums goes to work in seconds. nothing works faster.
6:35 pm
♪ tum ta tum tum tums premier of the packed bag. you know when to hold 'em... and how to fold 'em. and from national. because only national lets you choose any car in the aisle...and go. you can even take a full-size or above and still pay the mid-size price. here we are... [ male announcer ] and there you go, business pro. there you go. go national. go like a pro.
6:36 pm
over a million people have discovered how easy it is to use legalzoom for important legal documents. so start your business, protect your family, launch your dreams. at we put the law on your side. ska.
6:37 pm
as republicans war against immigrants is very revealing on how they've used latinos in general. arizona state president russell pierce sent a letter from a local substitute teacher which read in part, hispanic students do not want to be educated but rather be gang members and gangsters. they hate america and are determined to reclaim this area from mexico. then one of pearce's colleagues read the letter on the senate floor. so that hateful language is now in the official language of the legislature. and he's standing by it, refusing to apologize. now let me show you why this is a disastrous strategy for the republican party. hispanics now make up more than 16% of the population, twice the percentage of 2000. huge growth. and the reason that scares republicans, latinos generally vote democratic. even during the republican wave of victories in the house of representatives last year,
6:38 pm
latinos voted 60 to 38 inform favor of democrats. it was worse in arizona. 71% of the latinos voted for the democratic candidate. only 27% went for governor jan brewer. in texas, only 38% of latinos voted for governor perry. and 61% chose the democratic candidate last year. further more, the hispanic population in texas has jumped more than 43% since 2000. nondstdhi t rn blue and democrats start winning its 38 electoral votes, that's game over for the republicans. but republicans in the texas house of representatives are on the case. this week they passed a bill requiring people to show government issued photo id when they vote. the funny thing is people who turn out people who don't have photo ids are minorities and senior citizens. texas isn't the only state doing
6:39 pm
this. ohio republicans also just pa d passed an incredibly restrictive voter law. which could affect 900,000 people, mostly senior citizens and minorities. republicans say the bill is to combat voter fraud. let me show you how ridiculous that is. in ohio, there were only four instances of voter fraud in 2002 and 2004 out or more than 9 million votes. come on. and ohio's latino population has also increased 60% over the last 10 years. look, this isn't complicated. more minorities vote for democrats, so republicans try to find every conceivable way to prevent minorities from voting. but they're plugging a hole in a dam and that dam is going to blow. if the gop insists on demonizing latinos in this country, they're in for a world of political hurt. now let's discuss the issue.
6:40 pm
joining me now is the director of immigration for the national council of laraza pep an ron brown, editorial director for the national journal group. reading that letter into the record in arizona, gratuitous, it's not even clear if that guy is actually a teacher anywhere, is kind of rubbing in people's face, this is what we think of latinos. what is it? that makes no political sense. is it just that they can't help themselves? >> i think we're seeing a lot of nonsense being talked about by elective officials and i hope pretty soon we can turn that corner. this is not the only issue, but i've got to say i agree with you it's suicidal for the republican party to continue on this track. democrats cannot take this vote for granted. the reason why latinos rejected particularly so many senate candidates last year is because of the demonization of the community, but democrats need to deliver to keep latinos in their
6:41 pm
corner. >> ron, how about these i.d. laws. republican conservatives say wait, wait, wait, what's the big deal? but is it really an effort to target senior citizens and minorities because they think, certainly minorities don't vote in their direction? >> well look, this is one of the analyst fights between the parties. republicans rail about voter fraud, democrats talk about voter intimidation. i really think -- it's really at the margin either way in the sense the dem graph ins are ir reistable. the minority share of the vote has doubled from when bill clinton got elected in '92 to 12%. to 26% in 2008. it fell off sharply in 2010 on average and that was one of the reasons why democrats had such a bad night, but as the census today -- the census results this week were like a postcard from the future. the next america is arriving faster than people thought and almost every state, hispanic share of the population, the overall minority share of the population is bigger than people thought it was going to be. and that is something you might
6:42 pm
be able to tamp down at the margin, but depending on how you try to manipulate the voter laws, but it really is an irresistible change in the basic structure of our politics. >> is there any chance the republicans actually lose texas? and they do because of large hispanic population, are they in more trouble than they realize? >> i think that republicans are in more trouble than they realize. and there's a really important debate going on within the republican party about not keeping on this course. and let's face it, it's not that you need to do pro latino policies. you just need to do sensible solution-driven policies that, by the way, latinos support and so do the rest of americans. but there's been this embrace of demonizing anti-immigrant rhetoric and anti-latino rhetoric which is not going to pay off. but let's not forget that right now, republicans are democrats' best friend when it comes to the latino vote. and democrats also need to watch out.
6:43 pm
>> right. now ron, you see these startlinf that cliff, no problem? >> it is a mixed message. hispanic share of the vote significantly lags the share of the population. only 9% of the vote in 2008. and as you noted, that was 2 to 1 for obama. that did fall off in 2010 and if republicans get 40% of the vote in 2012, they would be satisfied. but there's a pull in the party now towards a very hard line position on immigration. just the other day, jeff flake, who was one of the few remaining republicans, the congressman from arizona supported, a comprehensive immigration plan, renounced it the first thing he did running for senate. when you look at all of this, i think it does raise the question of whether republicans will feel a lot of pressure to try to solve this problem in one stroke by putting an hispanic, if they have one, marco rubio, something
6:44 pm
like that, on the ticket in 2012. you are talking about a population that is growing. and as importantly as the overall numbers is the breadth. i mean, this is a thumb on the scale now in a lot of states. hispanics are the majority of the population growth in 18 states in this decade and were at least 30% of the population growth in 30 states. this is not only texas, florida and california anymore. this is iowa and north carolina and georgia and the midwest. a lot of place where is this is now a factor in the election it had not been before. >> absolutely right. thank you both for your time this evening. we appreciate it. >> thank you. >> a major setback at the fukushima nuclear plant, raising safeties ability nuclear plants here at home. that is very troubling. we're going to talk about that next. (laughing through computer) good night, buddy. good morning, dad. (anno o
6:45 pm
♪ [ male announcer ] escape convention. ♪ escape definition. ♪ escape compromise. ♪ introducing the most fuel-efficient luxury car available. the radically new... 42 mile per gallon ct hybrid from lexus. ♪ welcome to the darker side of green. ♪ s it hit helps the lhe of companipanies like the she smallestt ofof th ththat lets yos your employeloy, pa and custcustomersvate and sharee
6:46 pm
so you can can unleash tsh the of your mor your peopleople. nuke plants in america. a new report raises questions about whether they're safe at all. that ooex next. [ male announcer ] opportunity is a powerful force. set it in motion...
6:47 pm
and it goes out into the world like fuel for the economy. one opportunity leading to another... and another. we all have a hand in it. because opportunity can start anywhere, and go everywhere. let's keep it moving. ♪ my vet thinks my insides are in mint condition. [ female announcer ] vets agree, a healthy checkup starts inside. our breakthrough iams premium protection formula is developed with vets with cutting edge ingredients for the lifelong health of your pet. [ dog ] healthy inside and out. come on, up high! [ female announcer ] iams premium protection. our most advanced iams nutrition. ever. [ dog ] i am an iams dog. ♪ woof. it's personal. i have diabetes. so i'm proud to manufacture the accu-chek aviva meters and test strips
6:48 pm
here in the usa. and now we put a prescription discount card in every box so you'll pay no more than $15 on test strips, which is a true american value for people with diabetes like me. [ male announcer ] accu-chek aviva. born in the usa. >> we a potentially major setback at the fukushima power plant. right now, officials are trying to find the source of radiation at one of the reactors. officials are calling the situation very grave and serious. two workers accidentally went into a pool of water 10,000 times more radioactive than normal. that is not good. they apparently weren't wearing boots, also not good and their
6:49 pm
feet were soaked. they've both been hospitalized. more countries have banned food coming from japan amid fears it's tainted with radiation. taiwan joins singapore, new zealand and the u.s. there's also concern about america's nuclear plants. there are 104 in the u.s. thethose plants. they explain almost 30% of those plants failed to report equipment defects that can pose, quote, substantial safety risks. according to the report, there were 24 such instances in a 10-month period between 2009 and 2010. the inspector general says it prevents regulators to learn about defects that could be cropping up at plants all across the country. so far the lapses haven't led to significant accidents. so far. but this is going to give you
6:50 pm
chills. it has to do with the bp oil accident in the coast of mexico. what they found is a crucial valve called a blowout preventer didn't work. it was supposed to seal off the pipe when there's pressure. instead they got jammed and left a 1.4 inch space. and all 4.9 million barrels of oil gushed through that space. and that's what caused the worst oil spill in u.s. history. they found it wasn't bp's fault, but a flaw in the design. does anyone want to bet there aren't similar flaws in our nuclear plants? peal aweus td u abt l isqume dec at nuclear plants. if 1.4 inches did that much damage with an oil spill. how much damage can it do at a nuclear facility? with me now is the director of reactor oversight for beyond nuclear public advocacy group.
6:51 pm
first, i want to sd ask you about these equipment defects. how serious are they? how concerned should we be? >> well, this is an inherently dangerous industry, as we've seen. so we need to have the assurance that there is quality control for parts that are directly related to our safety. and what this oig report, office of the inspector general has found is that there's been a bobbling of reporting of safety defective parts, fuses, circuit breakers, pumps, motors, any number of parts that are, you know, vital in the event of preventing operations from going into an accident or controlling an accident once it start start. the big problem here, though, the bigger picture is that the
6:52 pm
nuclear regulatory commission was reported back in 1990 as not managing counterfeit and substandard parts. and so the report from the oig now in 2011 is disturbing because it's back -- harkening back on the faults and failures of the agency to capture substandard parts again. >> let me ask you about this. i'm worried about the profit motive. if you make shoddy sweaters, i go to a different manufacturer to get my sweaters. that's capitalism. no problem. but if you try to cut corners at a nuclear plant, it seems that that could be disastrous. is there any indication of that at plants in the u.s.? >> absolutely. there's been a constant tug of war between production margins and safety margins and we've had a number of close calls
6:53 pm
precisely because there's a bias towards production. and to keep these plants running and get out of outages, get through maintenance, and get on with making electricity. and, you know, that's very risky. but i think the other side of this is that what's now is the u.s. regulatory commission is falling down as the cop on the beat. we don't see any enforcement action. what we want to see -- if you want impetus for improving and raising safety margins, we've got to have an agency that prioritizing enforcing safety margins rather than shielding the industry and its production agenda. >> and our politicians get bought by the different industries they're supposed to gu. we see that with the oil industry. if that happens in the nuclear industry and they start cutting corners to make an extra couple of bucks, that's not something you can play around with. that's something we're concerned about. i know that's what you're
6:54 pm
concerned about. thanyou soucfor joinus night. we appreciatit >> thank you, cenk. >> it's march madness, you know that. in college hoops and march madness when it comes to overthrowing dictators, we decided. whop will survive? we'll show you which dictators will take you to the final four and which will go home early. the motorola xoom tablet.
6:55 pm
with the velocity of a 1-ghz dual core processor, 3-d graphics engine, gyroscope, and a widescreen hd display. grab it and it grabs you. only at verizon. but you can still refinance to a fixed rate as low as 4.75% at, where customers save an average of $293 a month. call lending tree at... today.
6:56 pm
everyone has someone to go heart thy for. who's your someone? campbell's healthy request can help. low cholesterol, zero grams trans fat, and a healthy level of sodium. it's amazing what soup can do.
6:57 pm
we've got breaking news. the president will address the nation monday at 7:30. we'll cover that live. it's march madness when it comes to overthrowing dictators apparently. we'll find out which dictators are more likely to keep their grip on power and survive to the end. we start with 1 seed and former president of egypt, hosni mubarak who's been a one seed for decades. he takes on surprising fourth seed moammar gadhafi.
6:58 pm
the next matchup is ahmadinejad of iran facing three seed former dictator of tunisia, el zin zine el abidine ben ali. let's take a look at what happens in the brackets. in the first matchup, gadhafi upsets mubarak. who saw that coming? mubarak was once a powerhouse. but how the mighty have 23falle. in the next matchup, ahmadinejad takes it. that was a laugher. ahmadinejad was pressed early in 2009, he unfortunately hung in there and ben ali was bounced out of the tournament first.
6:59 pm
then in the middle east bracket, we're projecting king abdullah over saleh. his top general turned on him earlier in the week. so he might be going home sooner than expected. and we're projecting al-asad to take on king hamad. this matchup has got vegas going wild. it's a tough call. both are vicious fighters who have a knack for hanging around. but gadhafi already has f-15s overhead so we're projecting ahmadinejad to go all the way to the finals. and in another final, the al assad. this called go to final death. and that really is the middle


disc Borrow a DVD of this show
info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on